Systematic comparison of modeling fidelity levels and parameter inference settings applied to negative feedback gene regulation.
Journal
PLoS computational biology
ISSN: 1553-7358
Titre abrégé: PLoS Comput Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238922
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
17
01
2022
accepted:
25
10
2022
revised:
29
12
2022
pubmed:
16
12
2022
medline:
3
1
2023
entrez:
15
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Quantitative stochastic models of gene regulatory networks are important tools for studying cellular regulation. Such models can be formulated at many different levels of fidelity. A practical challenge is to determine what model fidelity to use in order to get accurate and representative results. The choice is important, because models of successively higher fidelity come at a rapidly increasing computational cost. In some situations, the level of detail is clearly motivated by the question under study. In many situations however, many model options could qualitatively agree with available data, depending on the amount of data and the nature of the observations. Here, an important distinction is whether we are interested in inferring the true (but unknown) physical parameters of the model or if it is sufficient to be able to capture and explain available data. The situation becomes complicated from a computational perspective because inference needs to be approximate. Most often it is based on likelihood-free Approximate Bayesian Computation (ABC) and here determining which summary statistics to use, as well as how much data is needed to reach the desired level of accuracy, are difficult tasks. Ultimately, all of these aspects-the model fidelity, the available data, and the numerical choices for inference-interplay in a complex manner. In this paper we develop a computational pipeline designed to systematically evaluate inference accuracy for a wide range of true known parameters. We then use it to explore inference settings for negative feedback gene regulation. In particular, we compare a detailed spatial stochastic model, a coarse-grained compartment-based multiscale model, and the standard well-mixed model, across several data-scenarios and for multiple numerical options for parameter inference. Practically speaking, this pipeline can be used as a preliminary step to guide modelers prior to gathering experimental data. By training Gaussian processes to approximate the distance function values, we are able to substantially reduce the computational cost of running the pipeline.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36520957
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010683
pii: PCOMPBIOL-D-22-00080
pmc: PMC9799300
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1010683Subventions
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB014877
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2022 Coulier et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Dec;17(173):20200652
pubmed: 33323054
Bioinformatics. 2017 Aug 01;33(15):2314-2321
pubmed: 28379368
PLoS Comput Biol. 2018 Jun 25;14(6):e1006235
pubmed: 29939995
Nat Commun. 2019 Aug 7;10(1):3544
pubmed: 31391463
J R Soc Interface. 2013 Jan 16;10(80):20120988
pubmed: 23325756
Nature. 2003 Mar 13;422(6928):198-207
pubmed: 12634793
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Sep 13;108(37):15112-7
pubmed: 21876135
Phys Biol. 2014 Aug;11(4):045001
pubmed: 25075792
Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 2010;9:Article34
pubmed: 20887273
PLoS Comput Biol. 2016 Dec 8;12(12):e1005220
pubmed: 27930676
Cell Rep. 2016 Jan 12;14(2):380-9
pubmed: 26748716
PLoS Comput Biol. 2010 Mar 12;6(3):e1000705
pubmed: 20300644
Bioinformatics. 2007 Oct 1;23(19):2596-603
pubmed: 17660527
J R Soc Interface. 2020 Mar;17(164):20200055
pubmed: 32126193
Bioinformatics. 2021 Jan 29;:
pubmed: 33512399
PLoS Comput Biol. 2007 Oct;3(10):1871-78
pubmed: 17922568
PLoS Comput Biol. 2019 Jan 15;15(1):e1006365
pubmed: 30645589
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2006 May 15;364(1842):1155-70
pubmed: 16608701
Bull Math Biol. 2019 Jun;81(6):1760-1804
pubmed: 30815837
Mol Cell. 2016 Mar 17;61(6):914-24
pubmed: 26990994
Bioinformatics. 2018 Oct 15;34(20):3591-3593
pubmed: 29762723
J Theor Biol. 2011 Mar 21;273(1):15-31
pubmed: 21184761
Genome Biol. 2018 Oct 22;19(1):161
pubmed: 30343672
Cell Syst. 2017 Aug 23;5(2):92-94
pubmed: 28837815
PLoS Comput Biol. 2013;9(1):e1002803
pubmed: 23341757
Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 2008;7(1):Article26
pubmed: 18764775
Bioinformatics. 2013 Sep 15;29(18):2311-9
pubmed: 23821649
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1972 Jul;69(7):1934-8
pubmed: 4114858
J Chem Phys. 2019 Feb 7;150(5):054108
pubmed: 30736681
J Chem Phys. 2021 May 14;154(18):184105
pubmed: 34241042
Science. 2011 May 6;332(6030):687-96
pubmed: 21551058
J Phys Chem B. 2019 Mar 14;123(10):2217-2234
pubmed: 30777763
Mol Cell Proteomics. 2003 Dec;2(12):1297-305
pubmed: 14532353
Science. 2002 Oct 25;298(5594):840-3
pubmed: 12399594
Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jun;40(11):e82
pubmed: 22373922
Curr Pharm Des. 2014;20(30):4934-40
pubmed: 24283955
IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform. 2021 Aug 30;PP:
pubmed: 34460381
FEBS Lett. 2003 Apr 24;541(1-3):176-7
pubmed: 12706840
Nature. 2011 May 19;473(7347):337-42
pubmed: 21593866
Bull Math Biol. 2019 Aug;81(8):2960-3009
pubmed: 29785521
Curr Biol. 2003 Aug 19;13(16):1409-13
pubmed: 12932324
J Chem Phys. 2013 May 7;138(17):170901
pubmed: 23656106
J Theor Biol. 2018 Apr 14;443:66-81
pubmed: 29391171